No. Not at all. In fact, let me again read from our legal analysis: The economic loss rule is a widely recognized legal principle that has been adopted by the United States Supreme Court in the vast majority of States. It states a party who has suffered only economic damages must generally sue to recover those damages under contract law, not under tort law. Tort law generally applies only where a party has suffered personal injury or damages to property other than the property in dispute. So we are having, I guess, a duel of legal analyses. But we are happy to share ours. We believe, again, the court precedents and the specific analysis I am citing make it very clear that recovery that is available today for economic losses under State contract law is not being altered in any way by this bill.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the economic loss rule and its implications during a legislative debate.
Share
More from Ron Wyden
Common sense prevailed today and that’s great news for Oregonians who shouldn’t have to worry about getting slammed with a huge tax hit on top of losing their home to wildfire.
Safe drinking water is not a partisan issue. Families across the country expect that when they turn on the tap, their water is safe to drink.
This bill gives him so much discretion that Trump can ultimately decide what countries to tariff, or what countries to exempt. And he can modify tariffs at his will.
This common-sense legislation cuts red tape, saves taxpayer dollars, and builds stronger partnerships between Coast Guard installations and Oregon’s communities up and down the coast that support them.





